Impaired color word processing at an unattended location: Evidence from a Stroop task combined with inhibition of return

A Stroop task with separate color bar and color word stimuli was combined with an inhibition-of-return procedure to examine whether visual attention modulates color word processing. In Experiment 1, the color bar was presented at the cued location and the color word at the uncued location, or vice versa, with a 100- or 1,050-msec stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) between cue and Stroop stimuli. In Experiment 2, on Stroop trials, the color bar was presented at a central fixated location and the color word at a cued or uncued location above or below the color bar. In both experiments, with a 100-msec SOA, the Stroop effect was numerically larger when the color word was displayed at the cued location than when it was displayed at the uncued location, but with the 1,050-msec SOA, this relation between Stroop effect magnitude and location was reversed. These results provide evidence that processing of the color word in the Stroop task is modulated by the location to which visual attention is directed.     

Configural and contextual prioritization in object-based attention

When attention is directed to a location within an object, other locations within that object also enjoy an attentional advantage. Recently we demonstrated that this object-based advantage is mediated by increased attentional priority assigned to locations within an already attended object and not to early sensory enhancement due to the "spread" of attention within the attended object (Shomstein & Yantis, 2002). At least two factors might contribute to the assignment of attentional priority, one related to the configuration of objects in a scene and the other related to the probability of target appearance in each location imposed by task contingencies. We investigated the relative contribution of these factors by cuing one end of one of a pair of rectangles; a subsequent target appeared most often in the cued location. We manipulated attentional priority setting by varying (1) the probability that a target would appear in each of two uncued locations and (2) the cue to target stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA). On invalidly cued trials, the target appeared in the high-probability location (defined by an absolute spatial location, e.g., upper right) 83% of the time and in the low-probability location (e.g., lower left) 17% of the time. In both conditions, uncued targets appeared in the cued object half the time and in the uncued object half the time. At short SOAs, the same-object and probability effects were approximately additive. However, at longer SOAs, the same-object effects disappeared, and reaction times depended exclusively on location probability. These results suggest that observers adopt an implicit configural scanning strategy (in which unattended locations within an attended object have high priority) or an implicit contextual scanning strategy (in which objectively high-probability locations have high priority) depending on task contingencies and the amount of time that is available to deploy attention.     

The relationship between covert and overt attention in endogenous cuing

In a standard Posner paradigm, participants were endogenously cued to attend to a peripheral location in visual space without making eye movements. They responded faster to target letters presented at cued than at uncued locations. On some trials, instead of a manual response, they had to move their eyes to a location in space. Results showed that the eyes deviated away from the validly cued location; when the cue was invalid and attention had to be allocated to the uncued location, eye movements also deviated away, but now from the uncued location. The extent to which the eyes deviated from cued and uncued locations was related to the dynamics of attention allocation. We hypothesized that this deviation was due to the successful inhibition of the attended location. The results imply that the oculomotor system is not only involved during the endogenous direction of covert attention to a cued location, but also when covert attention is directed to an uncued location. It appears that the oculomotor system is activated wherever spatial attention is allocated. The strength of saccade deviation might turn out to be an important measure for the amount of attention allocated to any particular location over time.     

Spatiotemporal distribution of facilitation and inhibition of return arising from the reflexive orienting of covert attention

Currently, there is debate regarding both the spatial and temporal relationship between facilitation and inhibition of return (IOR) components of attention, as observed on the covert orienting of visual attention task (COVAT). These issues were addressed in a series of experiments where the spatial and temporal relationships between cue and target were manipulated. Facilitation occurred only when the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) was short and there was temporal overlap between cue and target. IOR occurred only when SOA was long and there was no temporal overlap between cue and target. Facilitation encompassed the cued location and all locations between the cue and fixation, whereas IOR arose for the entire cued hemifield. These findings suggest that the facilitation and IOR found on COVATs that use noninformative peripheral cues are separable and stimulus-driven processes.     

Disentangling perceptual and motor components in inhibition of return

Following an abrupt onset of a peripheral stimulus (a cue), the response to a visual target is faster when the target appears at the cued position than when it appears at other positions. However, if the stimulus onset asynchrony (SOA) is longer than approximately 300 ms, the response to the target is slower at the cued position than that at other positions. This phenomenon of a longer response time to cued targets is called "inhibition of return" (IOR). Previous hypotheses propose contributions of both response inhibition and attentional inhibition at cued position to IOR, and suggest that responding to the cue can eliminate the component of response inhibition. The current study uses tasks either executing or withholding response to the cue to investigate the relative contributions of response and attention components to IOR. A condition with bilateral display of the cue is also chosen as a control condition, and eight different SOAs between 1,000 and 2,750 ms are tested. Compared to the control condition, response delay to the target at a cued position is eliminated by responding to the cue, and a response advantage to the target at an uncued position is not affected by responding to the cue. Furthermore, both response delay at a cued position and response advantage at an uncued position decrease with SOA in the time window tested in these experiments. The results reported here indicate a dominant response inhibition at a cued position and a primary attentional allocation at an uncued position for IOR. Nonsignificant perceptual/attentional suppression at a cued position is argued to be a benefit for visual detection in a changing world.     

Stimulus discrimination following covert attentional orienting to an exogenous cue.

Five experiments explored exogenous covert visual-attentional orienting following a brief peripheral cue. On each trial an attentional cue was followed by a stimulus in an empty field at 1 of 8 locations on an imaginary circle centered on the fixation point. The cued area size and the cue-target spatial relation were manipulated. Accuracy and response time were affected by the exogenous cue validity. Attention was allocated to a specific location in a visual quadrant: A target at an uncued location in a quadrant was not facilitated as much as target at the cued location, and a target in a different quadrant was inhibited in relation to a neutral condition. Cuing 2 locations in a quadrant was not as facilitative for targets at the cued locations or as inhibitive for targets at other locations compared with cuing a single location in a quadrant. Results are discussed in the context of several extent models of covert visual-spatial attention.     

Processing demand modulates the effects of spatial attention on the judged duration of a brief stimulus.

How does attention influence the judged duration of a brief stimulus? In the four experiments reported here, we show that the effect of spatial attention on duration judgment depends on the processing demand of the concurrent nontemporal task. When participants had to perform a speeded letter discrimination task in addition to duration rating, the judged duration was longer at a cued location than at an uncued location, regardless of whether the cue was exogenous or endogenous. However, when the same stimuli were presented but no concurrent nontemporal task was required, duration was judged to be shorter at the cued location, as compared with the uncued locations. Furthermore, although spatial attention influenced duration judgment, no object-based attentional effects were found. These findings suggest that, although spatial attention plays an important role in the judged duration of a briefly presented stimulus, its effect is mediated by the processing demand of the task.     

Processing demand modulates the effects of spatial attention on the judged duration of a brief stimulus

How does attention influence the judged duration of a brief stimulus? In the four experiments reported here, we show that the effect of spatial attention on duration judgment depends on the processing demand of the concurrent nontemporal task. When participants had to perform a speeded letter discrimination task in addition to duration rating, the judged duration was longer at a cued location than at an uncued location, regardless of whether the cue was exogenous or endogenous. However, when the same stimuli were presented but no concurrent nontemporal task was required, duration was judged to be shorter at the cued location, as compared with the uncued locations. Furthermore, although spatial attention influenced duration judgment, no object-based attentional effects were found. These findings suggest that, although spatial attention plays an important role in the judged duration of a briefly presented stimulus, its effect is mediated by the processing demand of the task.     

The effect of previous trial type on inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the finding that targets appearing at previously cued locations are more slowly responded to than targets appearing at previously uncued locations when a relatively long temporal interval occurs between the cue and target. This experiment was conducted to determine whether the magnitude of IOR is influenced by the type of preceding trial (cued or uncued) and/or the location of the cue/target on the previous trial. Although no effect of cue/target location is observed, there was a marked effect of previous trial type, as IOR was greater following an uncued trial relative to a cued trial. This effect was attributable to differences in the response time as a function of previous trial type: specifically, participants were faster to respond to cued and uncued trials when the previous trial type was identical.     

The spatial distribution of inhibition of return

Inhibition of return (IOR) refers to the finding that response times (RTs) are typically slower for targets at previously attended (cued) locations than for targets at novel (uncued) locations. Although previous research has indicated that IOR may spread beyond a cued location, the present study is the first to examine the spatial distribution of IOR with high spatial resolution over a large portion of the central visual field. This was done by using a typical IOR procedure (cue, delay, target) with 4 cue locations and 441 target locations (each separated by 1° of visual angle). The results indicate that IOR spreads beyond the cued location to affect the cued hemifield. However, the cues also produced a gradient of RTs throughout the visual field, with inhibition in the cued hemifield gradually giving way to facilitation in the hemifield opposite the cue.     

多个非线索化位置易代的一项实验研究

现在采用返回抑制范式所进行的空间非信息线索作用的研究,大多以非线索化位置反应时为参照,发现线索化位置的反应先易化后抑制。后者即返回抑制。本研究采用在返回抑制范式上增设中性线索化条件的方法,发现当靶子可以出现的位置为四个时,相对于中性线索化条件,非线索化位置反应快。这种非线索化位置的易化作用是独立存在的,它能使生物体尽快地对出现在多个非线索化位置的靶子作出反应。     

Evidence from a response choice task reveals a selection bias in the attentional cueing paradigm

In a typical attentional cueing paradigm, irrelevant peripheral cues produce early facilitation (fast responses) followed by later inhibition (slow responses) to cued locations. Here we examine whether cues not only influence the speed with which responses are produced, but also impact or bias which location is ultimately selected as requiring a response. Specifically, can cues influence not only the speed with which we respond but also influence the behavior produced? To examine this question, a choice localization task was used in which no targets were presented, and subjects were asked to choose which effector (left hand, right hand) to use in response to a centrally presented tone. Thus, following either a left or right peripheral cue, and then a central tone, subjects were free to respond with either their left or right hand. Early facilitation and later inhibition with this choice procedure were found in both response times and the proportion of responses to the cued and uncued locations. These results suggest that there are processes which initially bias response selection toward cued locations and then subsequently bias response selection away from cued locations.     

初级视觉皮层在注意振荡中的作用

注意离散性是注意间歇性地采集外界信息的特性, 这种特性在行为中的表现被称为注意振荡。尽管有研究使用经典的线索靶子范式和视觉搜索范式发现行为数据中存在注意振荡, 证明了注意是离散的, 但其相应的神经机制, 即注意离散性与哪些脑区有关, 尚不明确。研究采用高时间分辨率的线索靶子范式和双眼分视技术, 基于人眼视觉通路的解剖学特性, 比较了线索靶子出现在双眼(实验1)、同眼和异眼(实验2)条件下的注意振荡, 考察初级视觉皮层对注意振荡的影响。结果发现：1)双眼分视会对注意振荡发生的频段产生影响, 非双眼分视条件下, 注意振荡出现在低频(2 Hz和8 Hz)。而双眼分视条件下, 注意振荡则出现在更高的频段(12.5 Hz)。2)无论线索靶子出现在同眼还是异眼, 注意振荡的频段无显著差异。结果表明V1区双眼视觉通路或者更高级的视觉区可能参与注意振荡, 为探明注意振荡的神经机制提供了重要的行为学证据。     

内源性注意与外源性注意的跨通道比较

该研究利用空间线索技术的实验模式,考察跨视觉和听觉通道的内源性选择注意与外源性选择性注意的相互关系。实验结果表明：(1)听觉中央线索在较长的SOA(至少500毫秒)条件下,可以引导内源性空间选择性注意;同时外周线索突现也能自动化地吸引部分注意资源。(2)听觉和视觉选择注意是分离的加工通道,但二者之间存在相互联系。     

Examining the role of the fixation cue in inhibition of return.

To clarify the role of the fixation cue in inhibition of return (IOR), the present study compared four conditions: fixation cue immediately after the peripheral cue, in the middle of the stimulus-onset asynchrony (SOA), immediately before the onset of the target, or no fixation cue. With a 200-ms SOA, less IOR was found when the fixation cue was either absent or occurred immediately after the peripheral cue. No differences between the four conditions were found with 400-ms and 800-ms SOAs. These findings suggest that there is a brief period of time in which attention cannot be withdrawn from the peripherally cued location. Once attention has been withdrawn from the peripherally cued location, IOR can be found at short SOAs.     

Transient attention degrades perceived apparent motion

Transient spatial attention refers to the automatic selection of a location that is driven by the stimulus rather than a voluntary decision. Apparent motion is an illusory motion created by stationary stimuli that are presented successively at different locations. In this study we explored the effects of transient attention on apparent motion. The motion target presentation was preceded by either valid attentional cues that attract attention to the target location in advance (experiments 1-4), neutral cues that do not indicate a location (experiments 1, 3, and 4), or invalid cues that direct attention to a non-target location (experiment 2). Valid attentional cues usually improve performance in various tasks. Here, however, an attentional impairment was found. Observers' ability to discriminate the direction of motion diminished at the cued location. Analogous results were obtained regardless of cue type: singleton cue (experiment 1), central non-informative cue (experiment 2), or abrupt onset cue (experiment 3). Experiment 4 further demonstrated that reversed apparent motion is less likely with attention. This seemingly counterintuitive attentional degradation of perceived apparent motion is consistent with several recent findings, and together they suggest that transient attention facilitates spatial segregation and temporal integration but impairs spatial integration and temporal segregation.     

Automaticity and the capture of attention by a peripheral display change

The proposal that peripheral visual changes (cues) tend to summon attention automatically was tested by studying the effect of peripheral cueing on simple detection latency. Delay between cue onset and target onset, the contingent relationship between cue location and target location, and instructions to subjects were manipulated. Results showed that a peripheral display change could capture attention even when the target was far more likely to appear at an uncued location. When subjects were explicitly informed that targets were likely to appear away from the cued location they were able to suppress this effect, but were unable completely to reverse it by rapidly orienting attention towards the uncued side. Hence the process appears to be automatic in the sense that it occurs unless there are explicit instructions to the contrary. With explicit instructions the processing operation can be suppressed, but not completely reversed. This work was supported by the U.K. Admiralty Research Establishment (Research Agreement No. 53482).     

Selective attention and performance with a multidimensional visual display

Selective attention was studied in four experiments in which stimuli varied in both spatial location and visual form. In Experiment 1 the likely location and likely form of targets were both precued. An advantage was found for cued over uncued forms at both cued and uncued locations. In Experiments 2, 3, and 4, different forms tended to occur at different locations. Regardless of whether a location was cued or uncued, form selective effects were found in accordance with form probability for that location. It was not the case that selective attention simply favored certain locations or certain stimulus forms in preference to others. Rather, selective attention was sensitive to precise combinations of form and location. These results could not be reconciled with mental spotlight notions of spatial selectivity.     

不同SOA下视觉返回抑制对视听觉整合的调节作用

基于外源性线索-靶子范式, 采用2(线索-靶子间隔时间, stimulus onset asynchronies, SOA：400~600 ms、1000~1200 ms) × 3(目标刺激类型：视觉、听觉、视听觉) × 2(线索有效性：有效线索、无效线索)的被试内实验设计, 要求被试对目标刺激完成检测任务, 以考察视觉线索诱发的返回抑制(inhibition of return, IOR)对视听觉整合的调节作用, 从而为感知觉敏感度、空间不确定性及感觉通道间信号强度差异假说提供实验证据。结果发现：(1) 随SOA增长, 视觉IOR效应显著降低, 视听觉整合效应显著增强; (2) 短SOA (400~600 ms)时, 有效线索位置上的视听觉整合效应显著小于无效线索位置, 但长SOA (1000~1200 ms)时, 有效与无效线索位置上的视听觉整合效应并无显著差异。结果表明, 在不同SOA条件下, 视觉IOR对视听觉整合的调节作用产生变化, 当前结果支持感觉通道间信号强度差异假说。     

动态情景中颜色特征和身份特征在返回抑制中的作用

在动态的“线索-靶子”范式中引入隧道刺激, 以靶子与线索的非空间特征相同时的反应延迟测量返回抑制效应。实验1利用单向隧道创设客体的空间位置信息明确且可靠的条件, 考察客体的颜色特征在返回抑制中的作用。实验2利用双向隧道创设客体的空间位置信息不明确的条件, 考察客体的颜色特征在返回抑制中的独立作用。实验3、4分别采用与实验1、2类似的方法, 在动态任务情景中考察客体的身份特征在返回抑制中的作用。结果显示, 线索呈现与靶子呈现的时间间隔较长时, 4个实验中均存在显著的返回抑制效应。这表明, 动态情景中, 客体的空间位置信息明确且可靠时, 颜色特征和身份特征在返回抑制中都发挥着重要作用; 客体的空间位置信息不明确时, 颜色特征和身份特征在返回抑制中也都具有相对独立的作用。